Scaling Writes medium
In a distributed system, why is 'Split Brain' a dangerous scenario during Leader Election?
- A The system becomes read-only.
- B Two nodes both believe they are the Leader. Both accept conflicting writes from clients, leading to data corruption that is hard to merge.
- C The election takes too long.
- D The backup nodes shut down.
Answer: B. Two nodes both believe they are the Leader. Both accept conflicting writes from clients, leading to data corruption that is hard to merge.
If the network cuts between Node A and Node B, A might think 'I am Leader' and B might think 'A is dead, I am Leader'. Preventing this requires a Quorum (Majority Vote).
One system design question a day, with spaced repetition so the ones you miss come back.
Get the appRelated questions
- What does the 'Atomicity' property in a database transaction guarantee regarding writes?
- Your database is struggling with write traffic. You decide to 'Scale Up' (Vertical Scaling) by buying a bigger server. What is the eventual hard limit of this strategy?
- A developer sets up a 'Fire-and-Forget' write pattern (sending data without waiting for a database confirmation) to speed up the app. What is the major risk?
- Why is inserting 1,000 rows in a single 'Batch' query faster than executing 1,000 separate `INSERT` queries?
- In the Raft consensus algorithm, what mechanism prevents a 'Split Vote' (where no leader gets a majority) from stalling the cluster indefinitely?
- Your 'Logs' table has 10 billion rows and writes are getting slow. You barely access logs older than 1 year. What is the simplest strategy to improve performance?